Pretty sure it's a nod to reality, where certain weapons are simply designed to bypass shields and normal defensive obstacles. Morningstars and flails are the most common, but the khopesh is another example.

It's simply one piece of equipment countering another, the same way a great ax's AP counteracts leather armor.

"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher.""Not against a Servitor.""... We're all gonna die."

ValhallaGH wrote:Pretty sure it's a nod to reality, where certain weapons are simply designed to bypass shields and normal defensive obstacles.

Seems you're right, Clint was good enough to clarify that "they ignore the Parry bonus from shields and any Cover bonus". The FC version "ignores Parry bonuses from shields and weapons (in addition to Cover)", which is perhaps more suitable for Savage Armoury, otherwise players would just design non-shield defensive weapons.

However it's still pretty difficult to judge the value of the bonus. If your opponent has two defensive weapons then it's effectively worth a +6 bonus, if they have one defensive weapon it's worth +3, and if they have none it's worth +0 - and that's before trying to decide the value of ignoring Cover during melee (which I don't think has ever come up in my games, but I could envision a few specific situations where it might become an issue).

I guess you could just call it +3. But then a tactical player will carry a flail for facing people armed with defensive weapons, and a different weapon for other opponents. So if you want players to stick with weapons "appropriate to the character concept" (as described in the Savage Armoury introduction), then I'd still suggest just using the Strong Offence ability; the flail will still be hard to defend against, but it'll be equally useful against all opponents.

First, let me say I love your Savage Armoury system and will use it if I ever run a Fantasy game using Savage Worlds.

Zadmar wrote:I guess you could just call it +3. But then a tactical player will carry a flail for facing people armed with defensive weapons, and a different weapon for other opponents. So if you want players to stick with weapons "appropriate to the character concept" (as described in the Savage Armoury introduction), then I'd still suggest just using the Strong Offence ability; the flail will still be hard to defend against, but it'll be equally useful against all opponents.

I think I'd be prone to giving Flails "ignores Parry bonuses from shields and weapons (in addition to Cover)" as a +3 ability rather than just giving them Strong Offense. It gives flails a unique niche and feel.

I'm not sure we need to worry over much about the idea of a character carrying a flail and another weapon and picking which to use based on the situation. I mean, is that really a bad thing anyway? It seems in-concept for some dedicated melee fighters. Also, we don't worry about this for AP weapons, which also lose out on their bonus vs. some opponents.

Zadmar wrote:But then a tactical player will carry a flail for facing people armed with defensive weapons, and a different weapon for other opponents.

Historically, it was completely normal for a warrior to have two or more weapons. While it's not a common occurrence in fiction, most fiction makes me want to laugh or vomit in disgust when it gets to talking about "real fighting". Most of the authors hadn't been closer to real violence than a grade school fistfight.

"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher.""Not against a Servitor.""... We're all gonna die."

JamesG wrote:I'm not sure we need to worry over much about the idea of a character carrying a flail and another weapon and picking which to use based on the situation. I mean, is that really a bad thing anyway? It seems in-concept for some dedicated melee fighters. Also, we don't worry about this for AP weapons, which also lose out on their bonus vs. some opponents.

The AP ability is cheaper (usually just +1, occasionally +2) so it has less impact on the total value of the weapon, plus armour isn't something you can easily don and doff in the heat of battle, and only in extreme cases (2 AP vs light armour) can the weapon completely neutralise the benefits of the armour.

However in the case of flails we're talking weapon versus weapon rather than weapon versus armour, and Strong Offence already provides the same style of bonus as ignoring Parry (i.e., it makes the weapon harder to defend against) while being equally effective against all weapons.

It's not a huge problem, but the current solution in Savage Armoury avoids it completely, so the real question is whether it's worth changing it.

ValhallaGH wrote:Historically, it was completely normal for a warrior to have two or more weapons. While it's not a common occurrence in fiction, most fiction makes me want to laugh or vomit in disgust when it gets to talking about "real fighting".

I don't mind players having multiple weapons, I'd just rather avoid melee combat turning into rock-paper-scissors, with characters using Quick Draw to shuffle their weapons around every round. It's not about realism, as I've said before, but about encouraging players to select weapons based on their character concept rather than because they're mechanically superior. If you're playing rock-paper-scissors, and always choose rock, you're not going to do very well.

Zadmar wrote:If you're playing rock-paper-scissors, and always choose rock, you're not going to do very well.

Depends on how often Paper comes up.

I rarely get to be a player in my groups. One of the few GMs I'll irregularly play under is kind of notorious for never playing to your strengths. Got your character Fire Resistance? Might as well be Immunity, because you'll never get hurt by fire as long as you have the ability - no one is going to use fire attacks anymore, even if everyone had been using them.
He doesn't hammer weaknesses, so playing Rock all the time is usually fine.

Besides, the Quick Draw thing is another edge they have to take, and what are they doing with the weapon they stopped using? Did they drop it to pick up later? Did they sheathe it (an action)? Are they holding it in their off-hand (disarmable)? Did they forget that it doesn't magically go back into their inventory?

"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher.""Not against a Servitor.""... We're all gonna die."

ValhallaGH wrote:Besides, the Quick Draw thing is another edge they have to take, and what are they doing with the weapon they stopped using? Did they drop it to pick up later? Did they sheathe it (an action)?

Zadmar wrote:...plus armour isn't something you can easily don and doff in the heat of battle...However in the case of flails we're talking weapon versus weapon rather than weapon versus armour,

Hmm, I think you misunderstood me, or me you.

Your stated objection as I understood it was that a fighter would carry more than one weapon and use a flail vs. shield users (or vs. wielders of weapons with +1 Parry).

I countered that the same can be said about AP weapons. A fighter could carry an AP2 weapon to use vs. armor wearers, and carry a non AP (but say higher base damage) weapon for use vs. people with no armor.

We don't really concern ourselves with that possibility when it comes to AP weapons, so I see no reason to be concerned about it with flails.

The AP ability is cheaper (usually just +1, occasionally +2) so it has less impact on the total value of the weapon

OK, that could be a reason to be more concerned with flails since the difference between the flail and the other weapon is likely to be greater than the difference between the AP and non AP weapons. Not enough of a reason to sway me, but I'll grant you that it is nontrivial.

Strong Offence already provides the same style of bonus as ignoring Parry (i.e., it makes the weapon harder to defend against) while being equally effective against all weapons.

I guess one of my main objections to using Strong Offence for flails is from things I've read using flails is harder than using many other weapons, so it seems odd to give it an Ability that seems suited for weapons that are more accurate than average. Though I suppose that the Dangerous ability can be said to capture the "hard to use" aspect of flails.

Also for me the main benefit of a flail is wrapping around a shield so I prefer an ability to capture that, rather than an ability that makes it more likely to hit with a flail no matter what the defender is using to defend himself with.

Last edited by JamesG on Thu May 31, 2012 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

JamesG wrote:Your stated objection as I understood it was that a fighter would carry more than one weapon and use a flail vs. shield users (or vs. wielders of weapons with +1 Parry).

I countered that the same can be said about AP weapons. A fighter could carry an AP2 weapon to use vs. armor wearers, and carry a non AP (but say higher base damage) weapon for use vs. people with no armor.

We don't really concern ourselves with that possibility when it comes to AP weapons, so I see no reason to be concerned about it with flails.

It does concern me to some degree, but I can't see an easy way to avoid it (other than removing AP), and I consider it a lesser problem for the reasons I outlined - in particular the fact that you can't realistically switch armour during combat, so even if there is some weapon choice it'll only be at the start of the fight.

JamesG wrote:I guess one of my main objection to using Strong Offence for flails is from things I've read using flails is harder than using many other weapons, so it seems odd to give it an Ability that seems suited for weapons that are more accurate than average.

That's a fair point, but it raises a conundrum; how do you simulate a weapon that's both harder to use and harder to defend against, if both are represented by a single roll?

The flail in the core rules isn't any harder to use than any other weapon, but it is harder to defend against with a shield. The FC flail is harder to defend against with weapons designed for defence, but not for other weapons. The Savage Armoury flail (which I should stress is just an example, you can of course create your own variant) is harder to defend against with all weapons.

None of these simulate the weapon being harder to use, but one solution might be to give it a Fighting requirement - perhaps you need d8 Fighting to use the flail? I wouldn't make that worth any points though.

Another alternative would be to create a special edge for it, representing the weapon being particularly difficult to use and requiring special training. In that case I would propose giving the weapon an additional +3 weapon abilities, but treating it as an improvised weapon when used by someone who didn't have the specialist edge.

JamesG wrote:Though I suppose that the Dangerous ability can be said to capture the "hard to use" aspect of flails.

True, and the flail in Savage Armoury already has Dangerous. It also inflicts d10 damage on a raise, making it particularly effective in the hands of a skilled fighter.

JamesG wrote:Also for me the main benefit of a flail is wrapping around a shield so I prefer an ability to capture that, rather than an ability that makes it more likely to hit with a flail no matter what the defender is using to defend himself with.

A flail can also wrap around a shaft or blade - you'd have real trouble parrying it with a sword or blocking it with a staff, for example.

I also think it keeps things simpler from a FFF perspective not to have to worry about what your opponent is wielding when you make your attack rolls.

I've been thinking about adding an additional edge representing weapons that are difficult to use:

Exotic Weapon TrainingRequirements: Novice, Fighting d8Some weapons are particularly exotic and difficult to use without special training. Exotic Weapons have an additional 3 Weapon Abilities, but give the wielder a -1 penalty to attack and Parry. This edge removes the penalty for one specific type of Exotic Weapon. You can take this edge multiple times, applying it to a different type of Exotic Weapon each time. You may also take the edge twice for the same weapon type in order to dual wield it without penalty.

Thus Exotic Weapons have the same penalty as Improvised Weapons, and Exotic Weapon Training removes the penalty in the same way as Improvisational Fighter. You can use an Exotic Weapon without the appropriate edge, but the penalty is worth -6 points, so even with the +3 exotic bonus it's still effectively a -3 Weapon Ability; exotic weapons aren't really worth using without training.

But with Exotic Weapon Training, the +3 Weapon Ability puts it on-par with Trademark Weapon and Magical Heirloom, although each edge has its pros and cons.

Zadmar wrote:It does concern me to some degree, but I can't see an easy way to avoid it (other than removing AP), and I consider it a lesser problem for the reasons I outlined - in particular the fact that you can't realistically switch armour during combat, so even if there is some weapon choice it'll only be at the start of the fight.

OK, I think I see what you are trying to avoid now. This scenario:

FighterA enters combat with a shield in one hand and a bastard sword in the other. FighterB attacks with a flail to bypass the shield.FighterA drops the shield and switches to using the bastard sword in a two handed grip.FighterB drops the flail and draws his Great Sword.

I guess it depends on the group how much rock-paper-scissors games like this they would play. And as long has you house rule it takes an action to put a weapon away they will probably be dropping weapons like in my example, so the number of switches will be limited.

The Savage Armoury flail (which I should stress is just an example, you can of course create your own variant) is harder to defend against with all weapons....A flail can also wrap around a shaft or blade - you'd have real trouble parrying it with a sword or blocking it with a staff, for example.

Agreed. but the SA flail is also harder to defend against when the defender has no weapon at all. I guess that is the part that bugs me. The benefit of the flail should be it is harder to intercept with a weapon or shield. Giving it +1 Fighting means it hits more often in all situations.

Maybe a new +2 Ability that reduces parry by one when the defender has any weapon or shield in hand, but does not reduce the parry of an empty handed defender. (Though the defender is then subject to the Unarmed Defender rule as normal). If martial artists are few and far between then +2 may be a little cheap for this ability, but +3 would be too expensive if they EVER appear.

So maybe go the other way, a new +4 ability that is like the above PLUS it ignores any points of improved Parry derived from weapons and shields.

Leaving aside the rock-paper-scissors concerns, do either of those seem costed right?

PS - I really like the exotic weapon idea, even if I don't know that I'd use it for flails.

JamesG wrote:Agreed. but the SA flail is also harder to defend against when the defender has no weapon at all. I guess that is the part that bugs me. The benefit of the flail should be it is harder to intercept with a weapon or shield. Giving it +1 Fighting means it hits more often in all situations.

Savage Armoury also includes a Natural Weapons edge, and there's no reason why you couldn't give it a martial arts trapping. You could even take Strong Defence to represent a defensive fighting style, giving you a total of +2 Parry (+1 for each hand). So that would also need to be factored in.

I guess it could be +1 to attack unless they count as an Unarmed Defender. But I find that rarely comes up in serious fights, and even when it does the target usually tries to grab some sort of improvised weapon to defend themselves (which would now be pointless). It would be difficult to justify a point reduction for such a limited restriction.

JamesG wrote:Maybe a new +2 Ability that reduces parry by one when the defender has any weapon or shield in hand, but does not reduce the parry of an empty handed defender. (Though the defender is then subject to the Unarmed Defender rule as normal). If martial artists are few and far between then +2 may be a little cheap for this ability, but +3 would be too expensive if they EVER appear.

So maybe go the other way, a new +4 ability that is like the above PLUS it ignores any points of improved Parry derived from weapons and shields.

Leaving aside the rock-paper-scissors concerns, do either of those seem costed right?

+1 attack is normally a +3 weapon ability, and you can get up to +2 Parry from weapon abilities. So an ability that negates all Parry would be worth +0, +3 or +6, depending on what weapons your opponent was using. If it also only worked against certain weapons, then that would reduce the value as well. But it's difficult to give a general answer as it's going to depend on your setting. In a modern setting where melee combat is rare (and usually limited to fists) you might value it as just a +1 ability, while in a swashbuckling setting where characters frequently fight with a rapier and main gauche it might be a +5 ability.

Anyway, I've updated the PDF to include the Exotic Weapon Training edge, along with the "Exotic" weapon ability. I've also added rules for tough clothing (effectively very weak armour), which should make the AP ability come into play a bit more often, and I've changed the Bastard (sword) bonus from a +1 die raise to a flat +1 bonus (otherwise you can end up with a strange situation whereby certain people can use the weapon one-handed, but are too weak to use it two-handed).

JamesG wrote:OK, I think I see what you are trying to avoid now. This scenario:

FighterA enters combat with a shield in one hand and a bastard sword in the other. FighterB attacks with a flail to bypass the shield.FighterA drops the shield and switches to using the bastard sword in a two handed grip.FighterB drops the flail and draws his Great Sword.

Or I could see Fighter B just keep using the flail and not having to suffer -2 to his attack, which could make all of the difference if he gets a shaken result.

Mylon wrote:Or I could see Fighter B just keep using the flail and not having to suffer -2 to his attack, which could make all of the difference if he gets a shaken result.

There's no -2 penalty for "characters using Quick Draw to shuffle their weapons around every round", and as I also pointed out, "with the simplified encumbrance system the player could have a stack of light weapons that would last them quite a few rounds".

JamesG wrote:Agreed. but the SA flail is also harder to defend against when the defender has no weapon at all. I guess that is the part that bugs me. The benefit of the flail should be it is harder to intercept with a weapon or shield. Giving it +1 Fighting means it hits more often in all situations.

Savage Armoury also includes a Natural Weapons edge, and there's no reason why you couldn't give it a martial arts trapping. You could even take Strong Defence to represent a defensive fighting style, giving you a total of +2 Parry (+1 for each hand). So that would also need to be factored in.

Actually I was just taking a look at the Natural Weapons Edge in Savage Armoury and it does not seem balanced with the core rules Martial Artist Edge which has the same requirements. Martial Artist means a character is never considered unarmed and does STR + 1d4 damage. Natural Weapons means a character is never considered unarmed and does STR + 1d8, or STR + 1d6 2AP, or some other damage that is better than 1d4, depending on how they build the natural weapon.

Does this concern you? Seems to me the Natural Weapons Edge is a little too good, or the Martial Artist Edge is a little too weak.

I guess it could be +1 to attack unless they count as an Unarmed Defender. But I find that rarely comes up in serious fights, and even when it does the target usually tries to grab some sort of improvised weapon to defend themselves (which would now be pointless). It would be difficult to justify a point reduction for such a limited restriction.

I wouldn't define it as "unless they count as an Unarmed Defender" since the flail user should not get a bonus vs. people with Martial Arts Edge, or with the Natural Weapons Edge (though that might depend a bit on the Trappings of the natural weapon). And people with those Edges would not try and grab an improvised weapon. So I guess whether the ability is worth a point reduction depends on how common those Edges are. As I indicated later in my post, I think it is worth some reduction, but probably not a full point.

How about a new 5 point ability called Hard to Parry that does two things
a) Reduces an opponent's Parry by 1 if the opponent has any weapon or shield in hand.
and
b) Reduces any bonus the opponent gets to Parry via weapon or shield abilities by 1. (So +1 Parry becomes +0 and +2 Parry becomes +1).

Let's assume that opponents with the Natural Weapons Edge (and who are currently using those natural weapons of course) do NOT have their Parry reduced at all by this ability.

As we discussed, a) is worth somewhere between 2 and 3 points as an ability, let's say it is worth 2.5. Item b) is worth either 0 or +3 depending on whether the opponent has weapons/shields that give a bonus to Parry. Again let's split the difference and call that +1.5. That would imply a cost of 4, but due to the synergy of the two bonuses, we'll bump it up to 5.

Then a basic flail could be d6 with Hard to Parry, Dangerous, and Unwieldy.

I was also thinking Weak Defence (-1 Parry for the user) makes sense for flails, but then it would need another 3 points of positive abilities. Maybe Very High Raise Die and Bludgeoning would work?

JamesG wrote:Actually I was just taking a look at the Natural Weapons Edge in Savage Armoury and it does not seem balanced with the core rules Martial Artist Edge which has the same requirements. Martial Artist means a character is never considered unarmed and does STR + 1d4 damage.

And Improved Martial Artist is a Veteran edge that increases the unarmed damage to Str+d6.

On the other hand, page 22 of SWD lists "natural weapons such as claws that cause Str+d6 damage" as a +1 racial ability, worth half a Novice edge, or a third of a Seasoned edge.

JamesG wrote:Natural Weapons means a character is never considered unarmed and does STR + 1d8, or STR + 1d6 2AP, or some other damage that is better than 1d4, depending on how they build the natural weapon.

It's not balanced against the Martial Artist edge, but against other weapons in Savage Armoury. For the price of 1 edge, your weapons can't be disarmed or stolen (a bit like a reversed version of the Device modifier from NE/SPC). But in a direct confrontation, you're no better off than someone who spent $250 on a standard quality sword.

JamesG wrote:How about a new 5 point ability called Hard to Parry that does two things a) Reduces an opponent's Parry by 1 if the opponent has any weapon or shield in hand. and b) Reduces any bonus the opponent gets to Parry via weapon or shield abilities by 1. (So +1 Parry becomes +0 and +2 Parry becomes +1).

Seems okay balance-wise as a specialist weapon, but the mechanics are a bit too complex for my tastes. It also makes flails a terrible choice against unarmed martial artists (5 points of wasted weapon abilities), which could have some strange repercussions in a martial arts heavy setting with nunchaku, three-section staves, etc.

I've already received criticism for the complexity of Savage Armoury, and I'd rather not increase the complexity any further. But you could certainly add such a modifier for your own weapons.

Hey, had a look at this system. I'm not as experienced as many of the people here on the board, but I have some cool ideas. I like your system overall, but in my mind if something is good, it should become better. This is so that pc's can create their own unique and awesome weapons which are cool instead of going for the most mechanically apt option in the gear section. So:

- What about weapons with very long reaches? Zabimaru from Bleach is a perfect example of this, or a long whip if you aren't an anime fan. You can not create a weapon with more than 1" of reach using your system.

- What about weapons which can't block? Things like brass knuckles and whips cannot block attacking weapons, and thus make you an unarmed defender in melee. This isn't represented by your rules unless you choose to lower the penalty to -1 and use Weak Defense

- What about returning weapons? Like an ax with a chain attached to it, which the user pulls to make it return to his/her hand. This isn't doable within your system at all as far as I see.

- What about weapons with a fixed bonus to damage? Like the katana in SWD, this allows you to have a powerful weapon while you will still be able to use it if you are a low-strength character. As with the previous points, this is impossible in your system.

- What about special armor? Armor should be more modifiable with things like spiky, fully sealed, decorated, concealable, arrow-proof, camouflaged, magically enhanced, uncomfortable, easily donned, complex, padded, ugly, custom-made, partial protection, fireproof, acidproof, intimidating, and any amount of other modifiers. This would make armor unique as well and probably make it much more fun to make.

Modifier Proposals:
*Painful: this is for weapons which leave a particularly painful mark on their victims. Things like clubs with nails, barbed wire whips, hooked edge swords, and barbed wire arrows. -2 to recover from Shaken caused by this weapon.
*Hooking: this is for, well, hooked weapons. Hits with a raise automatically trigger a grappling attack as well as normal damage as the weapon becomes stuck in the targets flesh/armor.
*Mounted only: this is for lances and riding spears. As in the SWD this weapon cannot be used except from the back of some kind of mount or vehicle. Else it is an improvised weapon.
*Poisonous: for sneaky assassin weapons which contain several deadly mixtures at all times. Any hit target who is Shaken or better must roll Vigor or take an immediate Wound/Fatigue Level.

I'm not sure of the math and have no idea what these modifiers would have to cost in order to make it balanced, but they all seem like things which would assist in making a cool and unique weapon for a character to use. Also, if complexity is a problem, make it an optional rule or in some way simplify it. I personally find this not at all too complex.

xxlgeeklord wrote:What about weapons with very long reaches? Zabimaru from Bleach is a perfect example of this, or a long whip if you aren't an anime fan. You can not create a weapon with more than 1" of reach using your system.

You can actually create weapons with 2" reach, such as the pike in the premade weapon list:

For a magic weapon, you could also take Mystic Edge and add Lunge, increasing the reach to 3". If that's still not enough, I'd suggest allowing the Reach ability to be taken multiple times - although 3" reach is already 18 feet further than the reach of a standard melee weapon!

xxlgeeklord wrote:What about weapons which can't block? Things like brass knuckles and whips cannot block attacking weapons, and thus make you an unarmed defender in melee. This isn't represented by your rules unless you choose to lower the penalty to -1 and use Weak Defense

* Awkward: This melee weapon doesn't count as a melee weapon for the Unarmed Defender rule.

However I later removed it as I felt it was too prone to min-maxing; you could just use a non-Awkward weapon in your other hand and completely neutralise the drawback, giving you an automatic +2 weapon abilities with your primary hand.

xxlgeeklord wrote:What about returning weapons? Like an ax with a chain attached to it, which the user pulls to make it return to his/her hand. This isn't doable within your system at all as far as I see.

Wouldn't that just be a reach weapon? For example the Kyoketsu-shoge (the closest fit I can think of) had 12-18 feet of chain, which I'd probably treat as 2" reach (the same as the pike). So you might do something like:

xxlgeeklord wrote:What about weapons with a fixed bonus to damage? Like the katana in SWD, this allows you to have a powerful weapon while you will still be able to use it if you are a low-strength character.

A fixed +1 damage bonus is roughly comparable with +1 die step, so you could give people the option of taking a fixed bonus instead of a die raise. The core rules katana could then be done like this:

You could also simply ignore the Strength requirement on weapons created with Savage Armoury, as it's no longer necessary for balancing the weapons.

xxlgeeklord wrote:What about special armor? Armor should be more modifiable with things like spiky, fully sealed, decorated, concealable, arrow-proof, camouflaged, magically enhanced, uncomfortable, easily donned, complex, padded, ugly, custom-made, partial protection, fireproof, acidproof, intimidating, and any amount of other modifiers. This would make armor unique as well and probably make it much more fun to make.

I considered it, even started writing up some abilities, but I wasn't very happy with the results. In the end I found it easier to keep the armour fairly abstract, and use trappings for special cases.

xxlgeeklord wrote:Modifier Proposals:*Painful: this is for weapons which leave a particularly painful mark on their victims. Things like clubs with nails, barbed wire whips, hooked edge swords, and barbed wire arrows. -2 to recover from Shaken caused by this weapon.

Basically reversed Combat Reflexes on the victim, so I'd probably rate it as a +3 ability (the same as Mystic Edge). I wouldn't allow it my campaigns though, as it would require tracking Shaken penalties (normally I just turn the extra on their side to indicate that they're Shaken).

xxlgeeklord wrote:*Hooking: this is for, well, hooked weapons. Hits with a raise automatically trigger a grappling attack as well as normal damage as the weapon becomes stuck in the targets flesh/armor.

There's already an Entangling ability, although it entangles instead of damage. Supernaturalis has an Entangling edge which is applied to a weapon, and could be priced at +3 (Mystic Edge); the target receives an Agility roll to avoid being entangled.

xxlgeeklord wrote:*Mounted only: this is for lances and riding spears. As in the SWD this weapon cannot be used except from the back of some kind of mount or vehicle. Else it is an improvised weapon.

I'd probably just make it an assumed part of the Charging ability, or perhaps a trapping. I don't think I'd give it a discount.

xxlgeeklord wrote:*Poisonous: for sneaky assassin weapons which contain several deadly mixtures at all times. Any hit target who is Shaken or better must roll Vigor or take an immediate Wound/Fatigue Level.

Similar to the Venomous edge in Supernaturalis, so once again I'd make it a +3 ability.

Mystic Edge should allow you to reproduce quite a few abilities, and although it's technically listed as "magic only" I'd be inclined to waive that requirement for specialised weapons.

Zadmar wrote:You can actually create weapons with 2" reach, such as the pike in the premade weapon list:.....etc

(This post would become ridiculously long if I quoted your entire post, sorry.)

(the reach thing) thanks, you're right, I didn't look carefully enough. I will be more careful what I post from now on.

(non-blocking) okay, I see your point there. I still think it should be a modifier though, but maybe a -1 one. Using another weapon does negate the penalty, but in any other case you have -2 Parry. That's pretty bad.

(returning stuff) yes, you could call it a melee weapon with reach, but once you're throwing axes with chains, using bladed boomerangs, or using magically returning kunai, it seems to me you shouldn't be rolling Fighting, shouldn't get wild attacks, shouldn't be limited to throwing it 2" at max, etc.

(fixed damage) okay, thanks, this will work fine. I had assumed it would cost more to do this as a fixed bonus increases the chance of acing, allows weak characters to use powerful weapons, and potentially allows for automatic successes. A str+d12 weapon is ridiculous and almost certainly unusable, but a str+d4+4 weapon is ridiculously powerful, as it aces 25% of the time.

(more armor) I can see how you find the abstract way better, but in my opinion it is inferior. I don't like how even leather armor becomes penalized, making it as good as impossible to have an effective "rogue" character with armor. Also, it means that there are 3 kinds of armor in the world, with no unique and awesome armors for the players to explore and no awesome customization.

(painful) Ah, yes, tracking those modifiers would become tiring after a little. Definetely a no in a campaign with a lot of mass combat. Thanks for statting it anyway though, I'm really careful of the balance when I look at someone else's system.

(hooking) I'll have a look at Supernaturalis. Thanks.

(mounted) here I am forced to disagree. "Mounted Only" means that it cannot be used in dungeons, buildings, caves, big cities, boats, places where you want to be stealthy, and any other place you don't ride your steed. Also, even in mounted combat, a Shaken/Wound to either the steed or the rider forces a Riding roll or the rider is thrown off, at which point the weapon becomes useless. You are also in danger when there is difficult terrain, the steed is panicked, or you are attempting a maneauver with your steed. Any point at which you are not ready for battle your weapon is useless as well, as you are not mounted.

(poison) Again, I'll have to look at Supernaturalis, but it looks promising.

The Savage Armoury to me seems like an awesome idea. It allows for cool custom weapons for the characters in a setting where it is appropriate, balanced weaponry in a setting where it is not, an easy way of adding balanced enchantments to weapons, potentially a way to create awesome modified (power) armor, a system for easily creating any setting appropriate weapon, and potentially so much more. As I said before, to me all that is awesome is awesome because it can become even more so, and something which does not improve and change will wither and die. Please continue working on this, as it is too awesome to allow it to disapear.